back to article Apple and Samsung are plotting to KILL OFF the SIM CARD - report

Smartphone goliaths Apple and Samsung are reportedly confabulating at a high level regarding plans for hardware which would replace SIM cards in mobile devices - this technology would be embedded in phones, tablets etc and would not be exchangeable to different devices. This is according to the Financial Times, which claims …

  1. John Tserkezis

    Yeah, right.

    Oh rubbish. It's aiming at shifting the user changing SIMs on a whim, to the carriers changing SIMs on a whim.

    Instead of "just" buying a new SIM card over the counter, you need to call the new carrier, invariably get connected to India, after you spend an hour screwing around with the DTMF menus. When you're finally connected, you say you bought a new phone with a built-in SIM, and they tell you 'fuck off we can't help you'.

    All in the interest of progress you understand.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Dear competition commish...

      BAN THIS

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Dear competition commish...

        NO BAN THIS

        1. Lamont Cranston

          SICK FILTH

          ^ BAN THIS

      2. N13L5

        Re: BAN THIS

        With the corrupt from the head governments in UK, US and EU? Good luck getting this banned.

        Either way, I already don't buy Crapple phones, they really are the 1984 company.

        If Samsung phones come without 1 or 2 sim slots, their sales will drop off a cliff while there's still carriers who don't do Orwell just yet.

  2. LeoP

    And the carriers smile

    So now your device is finally and truly locked to a network.

    El-cheapo prepaid local SIM for data in the holidays? Forget it - please hand over the roaming fees!

    Switch carriers but keep the device (and I am not talking carrier-sponsored devices!) - nah, your lock-in costs now include the hardware and the hassle of setting it up.

    The carriers end up allowing only devices they chose on their network, something they have been longing for - and ofcourse preloaded with firmware of their chosing. Tethering? We have an add-on to your plan for that.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And the carriers smile

      >>El-cheapo prepaid local SIM for data in the holidays? Forget it - please hand over the roaming fees!

      Uh, what makes you think that a new system wouldn't make switching virtual SIM cards easier than switching physical SIM cards?

      Maybe you scan a QR code or something. I don't know. But your pessimism is unjustified.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: And the carriers smile

        "But your pessimism is unjustified."

        WTF?

        No doubt you think UEFI, "Seecure Boot", etc were done for your benefit too?

        Tell me, how do we replace the MS/NSA keys with our own? Maybe scan a QR code or something.

        1. bazza Silver badge

          Re: And the carriers smile

          No doubt you think UEFI, "Seecure Boot", etc were done for your benefit too?

          Actually Secure Boot, which can always be turned off (at least it can on the hardware I've seen), is for your benefit, if you want a signed boot process.

          1. Tom Chiverton 1

            Re: And the carriers smile

            " which can always be turned off "

            Oh no it can't. See Windows Tablets.

          2. BitDr

            Re: And the carriers smile

            Oh yes, secure boot can be turned off. It is not as easy as just clicking on a radio button somewhere in the UEFI settings screens. On an ASUS BIOS you are REQUIRED to enter a BIOS password in order to disable secure boot. Knowing people's propensity for forgetting/misfiling passwords, they will invariably one-day need to get into the BIOS (or someone like me will need to get into their BIOS to fix something) and they won't know or be able to locate the password.

            Now the real question, Given that WPBT can load software onto a system from the BIOS without the need for Windows being present in memory, what benefit does a signed boot process bring to the consumer that would cause them to desire it?

      2. Dagg Silver badge
        Mushroom

        Re: And the carriers smile

        "Maybe you scan a QR code or something. I don't know. But your pessimism is unjustified."

        How incredibly insecure!

        I can just see it, "Scan this QR code for discount voucher" Oops, you just changed carrier to some ultra expensive ripoff! Doh!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: And the carriers smile

          >>I can just see it, "Scan this QR code for discount voucher" Oops, you just changed carrier to some ultra expensive ripoff! Doh!

          Right... "Go to the feature that changes your virtual SIM card, enter your password, scan a one-time QR code to change carriers, and then confirm on-screen that you want to change your carrier to the one you just scanned."

          Gaping security hole I guess.

          1. Dan 55 Silver badge
            Thumb Down

            Re: And the carriers smile

            T&Cs apply.

            • You may be required to pay off your old operator's contract in full before being allowed to change virtual SIMs on your device.
            • If you are allowed to leave before your old operator's contract is completely paid off, your new operator's virtual SIM may be time limited.
            • Or your old operator may not let you leave at all.
            • Until then you will pay roaming prices and you will like it.
            • Your old and new operators may only allow you to choose from special expensive iDevice or Galaxy S7 tariffs, just because.
            • Dual virtual SIM not available.
            • Have a nice day.

          2. Antonymous Coward
            Black Helicopters

            Re: And the carriers smile

            Right... "Go to the feature that changes your virtual SIM card, enter your password, scan a one-time QR code to change carriers, and then confirm on-screen that you want to change your carrier to the one you just scanned."

            I'd rather swap a SIM.

            This is getting more and more like the sales pitch that accompanied replacing (not augmenting - REPLACING) our simple BIOS protection jumpers with an _NSAKEY which allows unimpeded REMOTE pwnage by whomever it is who holds the private counterpart to said key.* Certainly more convenient forsomeone but a total clusterfuck for the rest of us.

            GIVE ME BACK MY BIOS JUMPER

            GET THE HELL AWAY FROM MY SIM CARDS

            Also, why is there an AC scampering about this thread spewing crap about what a joyously salubrious innovation this is and giving the rest of us a single downvote? Is he supposed to be one of those "super influencers" I've read about?

            *and everyone else who's bothered to unpick the crapto

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: And the carriers smile

              >>Also, why is there an AC scampering about this thread spewing crap about what a joyously salubrious innovation this is and giving the rest of us a single downvote? Is he supposed to be one of those "super influencers" I've read about?

              Nope, there are a couple more of us who aren't so stupid that we assume "eliminating physical SIM cards" means "soldering a SIM card to the motherboard ensuring carrier lock for all eternity."

              I can enter as many credit cards as I want into Apple Pay and use whichever one I want for pay-by-bonk.

              Why should I assume that virtual SIM cards won't operate as smoothly and conveniently as my virtual credit cards?

      3. Captain Hogwash

        Re: But your pessimism is unjustified

        In my experience with technology companies pessimism is never unjustified.

      4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: And the carriers smile

        "Maybe you scan a QR code or something."

        Are you sure you meant 'scan' & not 'scam'?

        "I don't know."

        ;-)

      5. LeoP

        Re: And the carriers smile

        >Uh, what makes you think that a new system wouldn't make

        >switching virtual SIM cards easier than switching physical SIM cards?

        Experience with mobile carriers!

      6. dajames

        Re: And the carriers smile

        Uh, what makes you think that a new system wouldn't make switching virtual SIM cards easier than switching physical SIM cards?

        But what will happen to the "virtual SIM card" you switch away from?

        It's not just a matter of switching, it's being able to switch and switch back again at will; of being able to have two contracts or PAYG deals on the go at once, and use whichever is cheaper in a particular case.

        The carriers would LOVE to be able to prevent that.

      7. BitDr

        Re: And the carriers smile

        >>Uh, what makes you think that a new system wouldn't make switching virtual SIM cards easier than switching physical SIM cards?

        A SIM card is switched out in less than a minute, it enables a device to change networks with the network carrier providing card. Replace the old SIM with a new SIM and presto you are on a new network. Now, ask this question, "who benefits from taking this ability out of the end-users hands"? Certainly not the end-user, who at present simply puts a new key in their device to gain access to a different network.

        The cynicism is justified.

    2. JetSetJim

      Re: And the carriers smile

      Tethering? I don't think any of the UK carriers care any more - certainly VF and EE don't

      1. druck Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        Re: And the carriers smile

        JetSetJim wrote:

        Tethering? I don't think any of the UK carriers care any more - certainly VF and EE don't

        O2, for all their other sins, do support tethering.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And the carriers smile

      Wrong, I see it like logging into an IP phone at the office.

      If you have multiple profiles on the phone and then selected a different network to swap SIMs then I don't see the problem.

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: And the carriers smile

        Does your IP phone in the office have a minimum contract period and juicy roaming agreements to make money out of?

        You are in charge of your IP phone, but you're not in charge of your iPhone (not that you particularly are already, every time you turn it on it checks with Apple to see if the original operator has told them that the phone's unlocked or not).

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: And the carriers smile

          >>Does your IP phone in the office have a minimum contract period and juicy roaming agreements to make money out of?

          No, and neither do phone manufacturers.

          What does Apple care which provider you use, as long as you're buying an iPhone?

          If they do anything that might favor one carrier, then what's to prevent the other carriers from suing them for monopolistic practices?

          1. Dan 55 Silver badge
            Trollface

            Re: And the carriers smile

            Why are you confusing phone manufacturers with operators, AC? Are you being deliberately obtuse?

            The phone will do what the operator tells it to. If the operator says to the phone that the virtual SIM can't be changed or can only be changed for a short period of time then that's what will happen.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: And the carriers smile

              >>The phone will do what the operator tells it to. If the operator says to the phone that the virtual SIM can't be changed or can only be changed for a short period of time then that's what will happen.

              And when I hit the button on my iPhone 7 that says "remove virtual SIM card" then what association will my unlocked phone have with that operator?

              1. Antonymous Coward
                Holmes

                Re: And the carriers smile

                And when I hit the button on my iPhone 7 that says "remove virtual SIM card" then what association will my unlocked phone have with that operator?

                ...and there you have it AC: If your manufacturer walled up its garden as thoroughly as it and the networks would like to do, it would risk driving its revenue to the other manufacturer.

                Time to form a standard shunning cartel then.

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: And the carriers smile

        "If you have multiple profiles on the phone and then selected a different network to swap SIMs then I don't see the problem."

        I see it. It's the first word in your sentence.

      3. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: And the carriers smile

        If you have multiple profiles on the phone and then selected a different network to swap SIMs then I don't see the problem.

        Yes, because you lack imagination. That's hardly the only conceivable use case.

        A few months back my cheap LG phone died. Just went completely dead. Wouldn't power up. Internal short, maybe.

        I popped the SIM out and put it in my old Nokia Symbian phone. Thirty seconds and I had a working phone again, with the same number, most of the same contacts, etc.

        Maybe I'd be able to switch a "virtual SIM" between devices, but I bet it won't be that fast and easy, particularly if the source device is dead. Also note this did not require a third device or any sort of network connection.

        I won't buy a phone that doesn't have a removable battery, removable SIM, and SD card slot. (I also insist on a physical QWERTY keyboard, because I hate touchscreens, particularly for typing.) Given the vast range of phones on the market, I don't see why I should give up any capabilities.

  3. Bob Dole (tm)
    Holmes

    hmm, carriers wanting more money?

    Sounds to me as if it just makes things more expensive on the consumer for being able to switch devices.

    Consider the situation of buying a phone off ebay. You won't be able to just swap sim cards when it shows up. Instead you'll need to contact the carrier in order to have your device activated on their network. Which means the carrier is going to be able to charge you another "device activation" fee.

  4. Mark 85

    More profit for Apple, Sammy, etc....

    Cut out the access in the case for the card, the carrier, the connections, etc. Mount them on the main board. Save maybe a dollar or two in labor and a dollar or two (or more) on the card carrier and case hardware... It may not seem like much on a per unit basis but it adds up fast with the number of these things being sold.

    So everyone wins.. the telcos and manufacturer.. Oh wait.. not the customer.

  5. Youngone Silver badge
    Alert

    Cynics

    All the comments on this are very cynical (not that I think you're wrong).

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Cynics

      I've little doubt the pessimism here will indeed by pretty much exactly what comes to pass, but I find it utterly depressing that we have such good reason to distrust manufacturers and most particularly the networks not to use it to shaft us. A soft SIM should be an excellent way to get cheaper roaming or a local number; the reality is more likely to be a locked in and ultimately throwaway device or a whole new world of opportunities for the mobile version of slamming.

      A regulator with a penchant for brass knuckles would be nice.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Cynics

        Brass knuckles? You can only hit one person at a time with brass knuckles.

        1. Probie

          Re: Cynics

          You can hit more than one person at a time with brass knuckles. Have the up in a line and swing really hard, physics and the conservation of momentum does the rest.

          But you have to swing REALLY, REALLY HARD. M'okay?

        2. Loud Speaker

          Re: Cynics

          Brass kuckles haver significantly more impact than a wet cabbage - which is what UK regulators are at present. Unless the EU regulator grinds their face in the dust, they do nothing at all!

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Cynics

          "You can only hit one person at a time with brass knuckles.

          Ahhh, but brass knuckles have a visceral and earthy sense of menace to them that you just can't match with firearms or explosives; those kill, usually quickly, but brass knuckles are going to hurt - a lot and for a long time. Ideal if your intent is to persuade rather than kill, as one might expect from a telecoms regulators who rejects 'light touch' regulation as a bit wet and namby pamby, and prefers to model themselves on the Kray twins rather than the Teletubbies as Ofcom clearly do.

          Douglas Adams best described the philosophy, although admittedly referring to guns:

          "The designer of the gun had clearly not been instructed to beat about the bush. 'Make it evil,' he'd been told. 'Make it totally clear that this gun has a right end and a wrong end. Make it totally clear to anyone standing at the wrong end that things are going badly for them. If that means sticking all sort of spikes and prongs and blackened bits all over it then so be it. This is not a gun for hanging over the fireplace or sticking in the umbrella stand, it is a gun for going out and making people miserable with."

          - Douglas Adams - The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Cynics

      It's called "experience" among those who know.

      When operator businessmodel is to fuck up the customers in every possible way, why you think it would change now? Is there any rational way to believe so? Has there ever been?

      This offers more control, i.e. ways to fuck customers, than anything so far.

      It's not cynisicm, it's experience. Those only look the same to an unexperienced person.

      And if you haven't personally experienced DCMA-phones (and the contracts they had), you don't have it.

  6. Dana W

    They finally co-operate... on screwing all of us. Super.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    About time

    Have any of you seen teardowns of recent phone motherboards?

    The SIM card tray takes up a huge percentage of them nowadays, even with nano-SIM cards.

    Get rid of those trays and I'm sure Apple, etc. can make phones meaningfully smaller, thinner, lighter, or simply give them more battery life.

    I don't know what the mechanism will be to switch from one virtual SIM card to another, maybe you scan a QR code or you download it as an email attachment or something like that, but I imagine it will be more convenient than futzing with a paperclip to eject the tray just to find out that the card you want to put in is the wrong size.

    1. Dagg Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: About time

      "I don't know what the mechanism will be to switch from one virtual SIM card to another, maybe you scan a QR code or you download it as an email attachment or something like that"

      What part of this don't you understand! This is a huge security hole!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: About time

        >>What part of this don't you understand! This is a huge security hole!

        Look, I don't know. I spent less than 10 seconds coming up with the idea of a QR code. Presumably Apple, Samsung, etc. have spent more than 10 seconds working out a system that isn't a huge security hole. Give me a break.

        Just because a system isn't based on little plastic cards with little chips inside doesn't mean it's inherently insecure and it's inherently customer-hostile.

        You do a million things every day with your computer that are secure. And you're not constantly using mangled paperclips to swap little plastic cards to do them. So you're going to have to work harder to convince me that physical SIM cards are an ideal solution.

        1. Dan 55 Silver badge
          Windows

          Re: About time

          Remember those dialler viruses? They only worked on Windows softmodems because they could shut the speaker off. If you had an old-style modem clicking and screeching in the background with flashing lights going on and off you knew something was up.

          Want to make sure the webcam's off? The most secure way is with a hardware switch, like the early MacBooks.

          Do you want to turn the WiFi off on your laptop while you're on the plane and make sure it stays off? Then use the WiFi switch.

          Phone crashed and holding down the power button 10 seconds is not responding? Well yank the battery then. You can't? So sorry.

          The most secure way is the hardware way and SIMs will be no different. With a hardware SIM they ain't exploiting my phone's OS and changing me to another operator.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: About time

            >>Want to make sure the webcam's off? The most secure way is with a hardware switch, like the early MacBooks.

            What a bunch of great examples.

            Can I assume that your cell phone contains hardware switches for the camera (both cameras), wifi, cell network, speaker(s), etc.?

            If not, why do you have the idea that cell phone network authentication is so singularly important that it must be controlled with a little plastic card?

            1. Dan 55 Silver badge

              Re: About time

              If not, why do you have the idea that cell phone network authentication is so singularly important that it must be controlled with a little plastic card?

              Because I decide in which phone the plastic card goes. I don't have to jump through the hoops that the software SIM and operators enforce upon me.

              And if your fantastic shiny phone goes wrong, it's 1000 times easier to stick the hardware SIM in another phone.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: About time

              "If not, why do you have the idea that cell phone network authentication is so singularly important that it must be controlled with a little plastic card?"

              Because anything outside of authentication is basically irrelevant: Authentication is a key to identity theft and therefore it has to be bound to something you can remove from the phone and move to another phone.

              Soft-SIM isn't like that,ever. No-one wants an identity which is physically bound to the phone. When it breaks, voilá, no access to anywhere as you have no identity.

              When and not if: Phones break all the time.

              Funny thing is that SIM is basically water proof even if the rest of the phone, i.e. soft-SIM, isn't.

        2. rusk123

          Re: About time

          "You do a million things every day with your computer that are secure. And you're not constantly using mangled paperclips to swap little plastic cards"

          You dope, the reason you can do all those million things is precisely because of that secure little-plastic card. It's your secure identity. Not your phone.

        3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: About time

          "Look, I don't know. I spent less than 10 seconds coming up with the idea of a QR code."

          That's a lot longer than the rest of us took to see the problem.

        4. Vic

          Re: About time

          And you're not constantly using mangled paperclips to swap little plastic cards to do them.

          I don't used mangled paperclips to swap SIM cards either.

          Are you perhaps looking for a solution to a problem most of us don't have?

          Vic.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Stop

      Re: About time

      "it will be more convenient than futzing with a paperclip to eject the tray just to find out that the card you want to put in is the wrong size."

      It was Apple who started this fucking shit thing of new size SIMs...and besides, I like to move my contacts within the SIM.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: About time

      "... I imagine it will be more convenient than futzing with a paperclip to eject the tray just to find out that the card you want to put in is the wrong size."

      While the operator says no and you can't do a thing about it. Non-transferrable, non-refundable total lock-in for operator with the ability to kill your phone on a whim by disabling the soft-SIM.

      When you can't take it out, you can't replace it either and the phone is a brick. Not an accident at all, but the purpose of a soft-SIM.

      The operator _can't_ stop you taking the SIM out and swapping it into another phone and that is the problem the soft-SIM is solving. Anything else is just marketing bullshit.

    4. rusk123

      Re: About time

      "Apple, etc. can make phones meaningfully smaller, thinner, lighter"

      Last I checked the trend in phones was to make them bigger and heavier ...

      1. jonathanb Silver badge

        Re: About time

        They are definitely thinner though.

    5. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

      Re: About time

      Get rid of those trays and I'm sure Apple, etc. can make phones meaningfully smaller, thinner, lighter,

      Oh, so I should give up a feature that has proven useful several times for one that isn't?

      How astoundingly feeble are you that your phone is too heavy? And too heavy because of the SIM card?

      or simply give them more battery life

      Oh, yes. It's the SIM card that's draining the battery.

      I'm going to remove the physical sun visors from my car. That'll really help the mileage.

  8. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I think you've underestimated the ability of the networks to shepherd the sheeple into whatever pen they fancy there Sherlock.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      EU Roaming

      with that being almost a thing of the past for 90% of EU citizens this would not be a huge problem.

      What I'd like is the easy ability to go to a country where my carrier has no presence and get cheaper calls home.

      For example, O2 has no direct coverage in Jordan. So my phone roams on the Vodafone network. Calls home cost £2/min. If I was able to easily move to the local Vodafone carrier with a 20JD/month PAYG sort of tarriff AND have calls to my UK number routed to my new number then great.

      Sadly I don't think this would ever fly even if this sort of SIM made it possible.

      This is why I carry a dual SIM phone (Nokia) with me when I travel to large parts of the world.

      Mind you simply getting a local SIM in some places is a real PITA and a Pain in the neck.

      India is like this. You need a local from that state to almost sign away their life just so that you can get a local sim card. This feature ain't gonna solve that any day soon.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: EU Roaming

        @AC - Not tried this myself so can't verify it personally but...

        http://www.chatsim.com/en/chatsim

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wow

    All these posters automatically assuming this will be a bad thing for consumers....

    You don't think that they want to simplify/cost reduce their phones? Make it possible to provision a carrier instantly? Have one less component to go wrong, get dust/water inside, etc.?

    Do you really think it is in Apple or Samsung's interest to add to a customer's carrier lock-in? On the contrary, they want customers to be as mobile between carriers as possible, and be able to provision multiple software SIMs at once and let the phone choose your carrier based on the lowest price. After all, the less money you spend on monthly carrier bills, the more you have to spend on the phone itself!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Wow

      It's going to end up being a bad thing for consumers simply because it takes control of which SIM to use away from the user and gives it to the carrier (or in the case of iPhones, Apple, no doubt). That will inevitably be exploited for their own interests, and to suggest that view is cynical is rather naive. The swappable SIM has proved to be one of the major successes of GSM and it's successors, and shouldn't be given up lightly.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Wow

        >>It's going to end up being a bad thing for consumers simply because it takes control of which SIM to use away from the user and gives it to the carrier (or in the case of iPhones, Apple, no doubt).

        How are you getting this from the article?

        A virtual SIM card system will presumably give you the same abilities as a physical SIM card system.

        Where in the world does it say that you would be giving control to Apple or anyone else re: which SIM cards you can use?

        I'm fairly certain that can't happen if only because it would be illegal in several countries/regions, notably Hong Kong.

        1. SImon Hobson Bronze badge
          FAIL

          Re: Wow

          > virtual SIM card system will presumably give you the same abilities as a physical SIM card system.

          That's an assumption, and you know what assumption does don't you - it makes an "ass" out of "u" and "me".

          However, you are correct that a soft-SIm COULD provide all the facilities a normal removable SIM card can do. That's "could", not necessarily "will".

          Those of use with longer memories than a goldfish (7 seconds ?) can look back and see how most manufacturers - especially Apple - have been heading down a road of user lockin. Microsoft had a bit of a go in the 90s, but it took Apple to show them how to do it and only now is MS catching up.

          So it's a fairly safe bet that to switch sim you'll need to connect your iThingy to your computer, run whatever Apple software it is by then (currently iTunes), and can then configure the device - but only using carriers that appear on the list of available carriers. SO this will be about who is prepared to give Apple enough dosh to appear in that list. It's no different to applications for your iWhatsit - if you are a developer then you play by Apple's rules, accept Apple's decisions without question, and pay over your Danegelt to Apple.

          I really can't see Apple being more liberal with the SIM & carrier choice than they are with applications - all in the name of security of course !

          And of course, the carriers win as well. They'll be able to control which devices the 'sim' can be used with - so if you've bought an expensive iThingy, the carrier will now be able to properly enforce you only using their more expensive iThinky tariffs with it.

          And even if, if we take leave of our senses and ignore history for a bit, none of this restrictive practice does come about - there is still the issue of practicality.

          I can pop the SIM out of my phone and pop it into another device - I used to do that a fair bit when I had a phone that didn't tether. And as above, I can take the SIM out and pop a different one in - I used to do that as well when I used to keep a PAYG one going for backup (patchy coverage round here).

          Once you go soft SIM, then the carrier can prevent you moving the SIM to another device, or restrict how often you do it, or require that you be online to do it (tough if you are in-communicado until you've swapped your SIM !), or charge a fee each time (some carriers still charge to unlock a phone that's out of contract).

          SO yes, the soft SIM could do everything a removable SIM card can do. But I really really really cannot see that happening. Apple alone has a good track record of doing lockin, it would really have to change it's spots to do something that didn't in some way restrict what users can do with devices it pretends to sell them.

        2. Fatman
          FAIL

          Re: Wow

          HOW fucking CLUELESS can you get???

          It is all about DRM - Digital Rights Management - and how you can be locked into only AUTHORIZED uses for a device.

          If I buy a SIM card, I can insert it into any phone it will fit into, and use it with that device, or more importantly, use my selected SIM with MY DEVICE as I see fit. Roaming fees and costs are one of-quoted example of why it is done.

          Once you make the SIM non removable, and in essence, bolted onto the hardware the user NO LONGER controls how the device is used. An uncooperative, or downright hostile carrier, can prevent the device from leaving (or joining) it's network if it so chooses.

          IN THIS INSTANCE, YOU (THE DEVICE OWNER), ARE FUCKED, and there is little you can do about it, because they already have your money, and the device becomes a throwaway item.

          Icon most deserving of your failure to understand the underlying motivations behind the carrier-device maker relationship: "Let's scratch EACH OTHER'S BACKS!!!"

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Wow

            >HOW fucking CLUELESS can you get???

            The answer to this would be 'very' it seems, based on the incredible level of FUD being spouted here and the number of downvotes being given to anyone who dares suggest that it might not be as black as people think.

            You can already obtain a software SIM, made by Apple, they come with new iPads that are LTE capable or you can get a free one from an Apple store.

            So it seems that we have something that we can look at to base our suppositions on.

            1) You have complete control of which carrier you are connected to, you select the carrier in settings and you either log in to an existing account or select a carrier that you haven't used and sign up for a new account. I'm not sure how, but you are only shown a list of carriers that are available, I expect this is done by just scanning for available networks and then some kind of handshake with each one to see if they support the SIM.

            2) You can sign up to more than one carrier at a time.

            3) If you go to a new device, when you log in you will get the option of transferring the account from the old device or setting up an additional device.

            Current disadvantages:

            1) Not all carriers support the SIM. In the UK only EE/T-Mobile are available for use.

            2) In the USA, AT&T will lock the SIM to their network if you sign with them. (For the eSIM to work long term this would need to become impossible or the system will be unworkable, at the moment you can just physically remove the SIM and replace it.)

            Possible problems:

            1) Carriers will follow AT&T's example if that hole is not filled. That said, it's now illegal in many countries to permanently lock a device to a network, so this may be a non-issue.

            2) It may become impossible to go on to a local network when traveling as you would potentially need a local address and credit or debit card to sign up for an account. That's not an impossible problem to solve, but isn't likely to be fixed in the short term.

            3) It will no longer be possible to get a PAYG SIM from shop and then keep topping up by buying more time from shops. Top-ups are easy to sort, you just use the current mechanism, it's the account details for sing-up and continued service that are awkward.

            1. davemcwish

              Re: Wow

              "1) You have complete control of which carrier you are connected to,

              Current disadvantages:

              1) Not all carriers support the SIM. In the UK only EE/T-Mobile are available for use."

              Hmmm...

              It needs to support *all* not just those that the h/w manufacturer has a 'Marketing arrangement' with.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Something all you negative ninnies need to consider

                No one is forcing you to buy one of these phones. If you think the situation is as dire as all that, don't buy one. Even if a new standard is agreed to, it will take a couple years before all phones on the market support it, and even then it isn't like the GSMA would agree to a standard that required ONLY the software SIM, and phones couldn't be made that ALSO had a hardware SIM slot. You can buy one of those, and only lose the ability to buy iPhones and Samsung's high end phones that would drop the SIM slot.

                I remember similar comments about the 'Apple SIM' (which is a sort of in between solution to what Apple/Samsung are proposing now) that Apple provides for the iPad that lets you select carriers from a list. As pointed out by an AC above this isn't without its problems, but while the Reg glosses over it, Apple/Samsung are working with the GSMA as well as the carriers, this is standards effort, not a couple companies trying to work out a private agreement with carriers. Think about who are the big dogs that will get their way when Apple and Samsung are on one side of the table, some major carriers on the other, and GSMA overseeing it. (Hint, it isn't the carriers)

                The sky didn't fall with the Apple SIM and all the worry warts were proven unfounded. It won't fall here either. If for no other reason than Apple is the one company that refuses to let carriers have power over its users, by not permitting them to install their own crapware and taking them out of the loop for software updates. The reason they made exclusivity agreements with AT&T etc. at first was because most carriers were unwilling to give up that control, AT&T decided it was worth it in exchange for a term of exclusivity. Once the iPhone was successful other carriers were forced to give up control to be allowed to sell iPhones. The only other phone OEM who has (at least in some cases) wrested such control from carriers: Samsung.

                Apple is not about to hand control back to the carriers after going to all the trouble of taking it away from them. The fact they're working with Samsung on this puts the muscle on the side of the phone OEMs, since between the two of them they sell nearly half the smartphones in the world. The carriers are the little guys compared to them, and won't be the ones getting what they want in this standard.

    2. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Wow

      Do you really think it is in Apple or Samsung's interest to add to a customer's carrier lock-in?

      Yes. Apple and Samsung want to sell more phones and the operators don't want to let the customers get away.

    3. Probie

      Re: Wow

      I love this... Just out of curiosity who is the gateway to the customer, because it sure ain't the device maker. This will end up the device maker bitch to the network provider.

      Its Nokia from the 1990's all over again.

      I am pessimistic because however much of an illusion it might be, I like a degree of control over MY things. This concept appears to remove that control.

      Oh an think about this, you would now have a device that you could NEVER remove from a network and NEVER remove power from at will. TINFOIL hat brigade ..... CHARGE ....... Oh the potential for abuse .....

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Stop

      Re: Wow

      "Make it possible to provision a carrier instantly? Have one less component to go wrong, get dust/water inside, etc.?"

      Yep, changing SIMs takes hours...Tell, when it was the last time that you had to clean up your SIM? And if your phone gets water inside, I guess the SIM and the tray it's the last thing you should be worried about. In fact, I'm pretty sure that they will be the few parts of the phone that would not be affected by water...

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Wow

      "All these posters automatically assuming this will be a bad thing for consumers...."

      It's not an assumption, it's reality. Some people choose to ignore it and invent their own.

      You see, most organisms, who have some kind of memory and intelligence to use that, can learn things.

      And, if you haven't learnt by now that operators will screw you as much they can, on every single item, you either don't have a memory or intelligence to use it. Sorry.

      That doesn't change the reality an iota, of course. It just is.

      Also: Apple& Samsung sell most or all of their phones to operators, not you, so you aren't even a customer, the operator is. That means a total and unbreakable lock-in serves fully customer's interests. Not yours, of course, but _you aren't a customer_ to Samsung or Apple.

      That's the reason for this 'invention' and only that.

    6. Fatman
      FAIL

      Re: Wow

      <quote>Do you really think it is in Apple or Samsung's interest to add to a customer's carrier lock-in?</quote>

      ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY

      It is all in the name of added dealer profit!!! (In this case, the dealer being the carriers.)

    7. Eddy Ito
      Facepalm

      Re: Wow

      Do you really think it is in Apple or Samsung's interest to add to a customer's carrier lock-in?

      How soon they forget

    8. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Wow

      "Do you really think it is in Apple or Samsung's interest to add to a customer's carrier lock-in?"

      Even if it isn't in their interest there's always the likelihood of unintended consequences.

  10. Picky
    WTF?

    How long before first SIM rooting?

    Oh nice screensaver app ... doh my phone has a new number & I'm being ransomed?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: How long before first SIM rooting?

      The iPhone would store the SIM certificates in the secure enclave, so no worries about that. On Android it would depend on whether the hardware of your particular phone had similar hardware and if Android or the manufacturer's customization of Android supported it.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm not seeing any upside to this....

    I'm on a SIM only contract and frequently use local SIMs when abroad. I regard the network handset subsidy* as a bit of a scam**.

    * No, the handset is not free.

    ** Though you can make it work for you, if you look around and avoid the latest/greatest.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I'm not seeing any upside to this....

      >>I'm on a SIM only contract and frequently use local SIMs when abroad.

      What in the world makes you think you wouldn't be able to continue doing this?

      Instead of a crappy plastic card that you put in your phone, you'd have to type in a number or whatever.

      But there's no reason to assume that virtual SIMs wouldn't be the functional equivalent of physical SIMs.

      1. rusk123

        Re: I'm not seeing any upside to this....

        "there's no reason to assume"

        bollox

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I'm not seeing any upside to this....

        >> What in the world makes you think you wouldn't be able to continue doing this?

        Because they can. Because if they do then it helps them and not me. Because they know that I will want to continue doing this and they can monetize it. Because they are greedy and I need to pinch every penny.

        The cynics are basing their mistrust in this technology on a history of vendors using every trick imaginable to overcharge them, creating a fee for everything from network access to activation, and in general make migrating away from their "service" as painful as possible in an effort to lock themselves to their "customers" bank-accounts. Yet all you can come up with is that existing SIMS are "crappy plastic cards" and that we should trust them. SIM cards are sophisticated electronic devices that are very robust. Characterizing a SIM card as a "crappy plastic card" is like characterizing a smart phone as "just a phone" or the LHC as "just a science project".

        The SIM is the key to getting on a network, control the key and you control access to the network. When you have a physical SIM in your hand then you are in control. If someone else controls the SIM then THEY (not you) have control.

  12. MrWibble

    Part of me thinks this is a good idea - no faffing about having to visit a real shop to get a car, or wait a few days for it to be delivered.

    But the other part of me hates that it'll be locked, controlled, and shafted by Samsung / Apple and the carriers to not do what I want with my phone - so when travelling, "nope, you can't change the SIM to a local one, you'll have to pay through the nose for roaming, since you're still in contract", or borrow a mate's phone, and whack your SIM in when on holiday, or about 1000 other scenarios that will be prevented.

    No thanks.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What an embarrassment of knee-jerk reactions

    Let me explain the train of thought of 90% of the people posting here:

    1. I currently take out a SIM card and put in a different one to switch carriers

    2. If the phone doesn't have a physical SIM card, there's nothing to take out and switch

    3. Therefore, I won't be able to switch carriers

    Are you guys proud of this painfully simplistic line of reasoning?

    Can you seriously not envision a technical implementation of virtual SIM cards that gives you the same functionality that physical SIM cards give you today?

    1. Tuomas Hosia

      Re: What an embarrassment of knee-jerk reactions

      "2. If the phone doesn't have a physical SIM card, there's nothing to take out and switch

      3. Therefore, I won't be able to switch carriers"

      Strawman argument, thus void.

      You can't change carrier because the current carrier doesn't permit it. And that is what _will happen_ when you have to have permission _from your current carrier_ to change soft-SIM carrier. When, not if.

      Which part of this is too complicated to understand?

      This is a total lock-in tool, nothing else and you'll _never_ get anything you don't already have.

      Only function it has, is to _prevent carrier changes_. Carriers love that kind of lock-in.

      You haven't learned that yet?

      1. Mike Bell

        Re: What an embarrassment of knee-jerk reactions

        "You can't change carrier because the current carrier doesn't permit it. And that is what _will happen_ when you have to have permission _from your current carrier_ to change soft-SIM carrier. When, not if."

        That is entirely supposition on your part. As I recall when Apple made a first foray into this kind of thing with their virtual SIM in the iPad Air 2 last year, network operators were up in arms about it. The last thing they wanted was for customers to get a new phone and make an on-screen choice about who they wanted to connect to. The scenario you describe is unrealistic. Virtual SIMs are already in existence, albeit not soldered onto a board, and this is what Apple say about it:

        The Apple SIM gives you the flexibility to choose from a variety of short-term plans from select carriers in the U.S. and UK right on your iPad. So whenever you need it, you can choose the plan that works best for you — with no long-term commitments. And when you travel, you may also be able to choose a data plan from a local carrier for the duration of your trip.

        1. Deryk Barker

          Re: What an embarrassment of knee-jerk reactions

          "The Apple SIM gives you the flexibility to choose from a variety of short-term plans from select carriers in the U.S. and UK right on your iPad."

          "Select carriers" is the key phrase here and your ignoring it undermines your argument.

          1. jonathanb Silver badge

            Re: What an embarrassment of knee-jerk reactions

            Selected carrier in the case of the UK, as you can have any carrier you want as long as it is EE.

            "Only" £3.33 per day according to the ad at the top of this page, which is just over £100 per month, so not a price I would prefix with "only".

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What an embarrassment of knee-jerk reactions

        >>You can't change carrier because the current carrier doesn't permit it. And that is what _will happen_ when you have to have permission _from your current carrier_ to change soft-SIM carrier. When, not if.

        Oh, I see. I would call this... maybe... a "SIM lock."

        Yes, I can see how that would be impossible with a physical SIM card.

        Oh, wait.

    2. SImon Hobson Bronze badge

      Re: What an embarrassment of knee-jerk reactions

      > Can you seriously not envision a technical implementation of virtual SIM cards that gives you the same functionality that physical SIM cards give you today?

      Yes, I can envision an implementation that does everything anyone could be bothered about. It just don't, for one second, believe that the manufactuers and carriers will do that. Apple alone is not exatly known for openness these days, and I can't believe it'll pass up an opportunity to further control what users can do with their devices.

      > The Apple SIM gives you the flexibility to choose from a variety of short-term plans from select carriers in the U.S. and UK right on your iPad.

      Note the "select" bit there. Not "any" carrier, but "select" carriers. Presumably the "select" actually means "ones who paid us enough to get on the list".

      Yes I'm being cynical, but that's a result of observing how some vendors act these days.

    3. dajames

      Re: What an embarrassment of knee-jerk reactions

      Can you seriously not envision a technical implementation of virtual SIM cards that gives you the same functionality that physical SIM cards give you today?

      That's not the issue. It would not be difficult to envisage a technical implementation that gave the user more flexibility and increased convenience.

      What stretches the bounds of credulity is the notion than any airtime provider would willingly support such a system.

  14. Jay 2
    Unhappy

    From a technical/hardware point of view a virtual SIM is probably a good idea.

    But in the real world we all know we'll get screwed. As soon as it's up to a carrier to allow you to effectively use a new (virtual) SIM, then you know you'll get held to ransom via contracts, red tape and generally unhelpful helpcentre staff. No new handset for you etc...

    It's not too far removed from the old(er) US model on the CDMA(?) networks, where they didn't have SIMs and handsets were locked to a carrier. Great for carriers, crap for consumers.

    One further point. I don't believe I saw it mentioned in the article, but would a handset be able to take multiple virtual SIMs?

    1. Tuomas Hosia

      "It's not too far removed from the old(er) US model on the CDMA(?) networks, where they didn't have SIMs and handsets were locked to a carrier. Great for carriers, crap for consumers."

      This is a good point and reminds us again how some people _forget everything_ they've learned from the past as soon as something new and shiny is presented.

      Soft-SIM is basically hard carrier lock which can't be removed. Ever. Want to change operator? Buy a new phone _and pay the old operator_ while doing so.

      That's the way it's planned.

  15. GX5000

    Ah crap

    This will not end well

    Purely a Corporate Win if this goes through.

  16. Dreams

    NSA drooling in the corner...

    Can't remove the SIM card? NSA hacking ghouls slobber and droll in anticipation.

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Switching SIMs for development and testing

    As it is, I have far fewer carrier accounts than I do devices, and I frequently switch SIMs among devices to set up test beds. Any process to switch devices which would involve carrier intervention sounds like it would be a major pain.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Switching SIMs for development and testing

      >>Any process to switch devices which would involve carrier intervention sounds like it would be a major pain.

      Agreed.

      Not sure what this has to do with the discussion at hand though.

      No reason to assume that virtual SIM cards would require carrier intervention to switch.

      If anything, I can envision switching between virtual SIM cards being faster and easier.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Switching SIMs for development and testing

        ""No reason to assume that virtual SIM cards would require carrier intervention to switch."

        I wonder how we'll de-register the softSIM on a dead iPhone and register it on an Android, for example. Just last month my Galaxy died so I borrowed my wifes ancient Blackberry. Not a smart phone but at least I could phone the office after each of the days site visits and they arranged an overnight delivery of a replacement. All my phone contacts went with the SIM too. Hers is/was a fairly limited SIM account so no way was I using her SIM for business.

  18. Deryk Barker

    If Apple are for it

    I'm against it.

  19. Looper
    Devil

    AC, DougS etc...

    STFU you complete and utter cretins. Especially AC, fool of the month.

    Benefit to the consumer? None.

    Benefit to the manufacturer AND operator? Absolutely.

    Follow the money, there is no other logical reason for this.

    Micro-SIM size is NOT a problem in tablets or current phones.

    Preventing removable backs, trays, slots are what Crapple and Shamedung are aiming at. An unopenable, unchangeable device. Taking away consumer choice.

    No access to the internals? Then no need for removable, replaceable battery, you'll just have to replace your entire phone every year, when the limited life battery dies.

    Remove MicroSD slots? Sure, then charge multiple times normal cost (like Crapple) for internal memory.

    No physical SIM? Great, manufactuers can limit operators? Plenty of money to be made from that.

    Operators have unprecedented control over number/phone combination?

    What could go wrong...?

    Fools.

    iPads already have them? So fucking what? They are NOT mobile phones, and the vast majority of people do not to roam with mobile enabled tablets. They roam with their mobile phones.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: AC, DougS etc...

      >> Preventing removable backs, trays, slots are what Crapple and Shamedung are aiming at. An unopenable, unchangeable device. Taking away consumer choice.

      Yeah grandpa, I'm sure you're also super upset that the processor on your laptop is not socketed. What WILL you do when a new 486DX is released?

      >>Then no need for removable, replaceable battery, you'll just have to replace your entire phone every year, when the limited life battery dies.

      Apple will replace an iPhone battery for $79. And if it's within warranty and it has less than 80% charge capacity and less than 1000 cycles, they'll do it for free.

      Maybe if you used your flip phone to call your grandchildren more often, they'd explain how this newfangled technology works.

      >>Remove MicroSD slots? Sure, then charge multiple times normal cost (like Crapple) for internal memory.

      Ah yes, you can get a 23847 gigabyte MicroSD card for $6.99 in the checkout line at Fry's, so why does anybody buy an SSD? (It's because they aren't as smart as you are.)

      >>Operators have unprecedented control over number/phone combination?

      Based on your poor grasp of every other subject you've written about, this almost seems like proof that virtual SIM cards will be GOOD for customers.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like